Disaggregating goods

If you have a question about this talk, please contact Agnes Bolinska.

Please note change of day and time

The history of the theory of decision is profoundly consequentialist, as perhaps it must be, at least regarding certain decision contexts. The central task, within such a theory, is to weigh the consequences on a scale that can take everything into consideration simultaneously. But this task is monumental, and potentially impossible. Not that the consequences are unknowable – although that too is a problem. I will set that problem to one side for this study. The problem I am focusing on is that consequences, goods of value generally, are very hard to commensurate, whether we are considering a decision from the point of view of ethics or not. I shall argue here that the wisest way with the question of weighing goods is not via a means of aggregating their value, but instead via a judicious means of dis-aggregating them. This goes very much against the tradition in decision analysis. I want to articulate the reasons why this is the most defensible form of consequentialism.